Jan 11, 2013 5:00pm EST
maker, and dan, chip down the price of the trade. >> i sold one of the jan 65 call cal calls. >> there we go. to cut costs, dan sold the january strike call for 35 cents and created his call spread. but he did something better. he made the profits come quicker and here is how. between the 90 cents he spent buying the lower strike call and the 35 cents he collected by selling that higher strike call, dan cut the costs by 2/3 to 55 cents and now instead of needing qualcomm to hit $63.40 to see profits, now dan can make it by $60.05 by january expiration. >> brilliant, brilliant. >> there is a tradeoff and by selling the higher strike call, he has capped the difference of the strike that he bought and the strike of the call he sold. it has worked out beautifully, because since the time of the trade, the qualcomm shares have risen 8% making this trade a winn winner. now, fans around the world are glued to the show and they only want to know one thing, what will dan do now? before we answer that, let's see how much money was made if you had bought qualcomm at the time of the trade
Jan 6, 2013 6:00am EST
him $20, profit of $390. carter got us in. where is it going next? got a cal call back to the charts. >> we would be inclined to stick with this. this stock over the last few years has been destroyed. it's early recovery we think lots of upside. 110. >> all right. stick with it. what do you say, mike? >> it's fine to say bullish on the stock, but not at that put. you only have the opportunity to make another 20 cents on this thing. i would cover the put, anybody who sold this may have done this already. we've made the lion's share of the $4.10 we can already collect. >> right. what's interesting about netflix is showing a lot of the stocks have been beaten down at the end of last year are now becoming treasure. they've seen nice gains. this week alone, the best performing 20 stocks of the s&p 500 this week and a few of them were technology stocks. dell and hewlett-packard stood out with 10% gains this week alone. dan? >> there's nothing good fundamentally going on at either of those companies. facebook is a different story in a lot of ways. there's a lot of hope in that name.
Jan 9, 2013 7:00pm EST
would be -- and people have talked about the crowds for cal ripken and tony guinn. >> thank you very much, brian shactman, likewise. and you can catch brian on cnbc sports biz. he's going to talk about the end of the nhl lockout with lundqvist, one of my heroes k p.m. friday on the nbc sports network. >>> now, something that's threatening the health and finances of major cities across the country, the flu. this year's outbreaks are throwing major cities into a real bind. one city has just declared a health emergency. that story coming up. i had enough of feeling embarrassed about my skin. [ designer ] enough of just covering up my moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. i decided enough is enough. ♪ [ spa lady ] i started enbrel. it's clinically proven to provide clearer skin. [ rv guy ] enbrel may not work for everyone -- and may not clear you completely, but for many, it gets skin clearer fast, within 2 months, and keeps it clearer through 6 months. [ male announcer ] enbrel may lower your ability to fight infections. serious, sometimes fatal events, including infections, tuberculos
Jan 11, 2013 9:00am EST
for it? >> on the if is cal cliff? >> yes, on the -- >> the bill we just passed? >> yes, the band-aid bill. >> well, first off it was a made for tv drama, we shouldn't have been there in the first place, but you know, my big stumbling block was in that bill, there was a turning off of the sequester. the sequester are the automatic across the board cuts passed in august of 2011 in order to pass the last debt ceiling bill. and apparently people thought it was okay to turn that off going into this year, but unfortunately it's turned off for two months and we're right back about in the soup with another debt ceiling deal. how are we ever going to get out of this conundrum if we don't at some point start paying the money we promised to pay. >> you just said something. how are we going to get out of this conundrum. according to an op-ed by mr. stephen moore, the president doesn't believe there's a problem. do you believe that the material in that op-ed is correct? do you think in your opinion that the government believes the president specifically doesn't believe we have a spending problem?
Jan 7, 2013 6:00am EST
that very question. saying, why are we talking about cal czar dates and not the new policy at the fed, which is substantial improvement in the labor market. >> but is that some members' frustration with the idea that we've already tied it to the unemployment rate, they're going to say look, we don't agree kind of along the lines we're worried about where things are headed? i mean it sounds to me like toy are starting to see some real pushback. >> right. it's along two separate lines. there's the normal economic division. you can see that by looking at the fed's economic projections. you can see where how many members are where they are for 2013, nobody really is looking for much more than a 7% unemployment rate. this year, which i guess under that -- if those forecasts end up being correct, the fed would go on and do qe-2 the whole year. how much is a different question. >> they wouldn't taper the purchases toward the end of the year? >> they could taper it, that's one response. the issue becomes, barry, setting expectations. right? you've got to set expectations for how long. and
Jan 14, 2013 9:00am EST
buybacks and i don't think it's all priced in at this moment. >> let me ask you one five sof cal question, say i'm a client of the bank at gold man sachs, like many people i probably bought a lot of bonds because i was very concerned about my own money, wanting capital preservation. i look at the s&p. it's up 100% from the lows of 2008, 2009 and i say to myself, i know i'm too allocated right now in fixed income. should i really be buying stocks at these levels. what do you tell me? what do the high net worth advisers tell a client in a situation like that? >> one of the most important things we have done this year for our clients is to show them five-year numbers. and we're telling our clients that as they look exactly as you say, look at bonds, look at equities, they need to look over the horizon for the next five years. and over the next five years we expect basically zero returns on a nominal basis out of bonds, which actually means a negative real return but when we're looking at equities, in spite of the tremendous run-up from the trough of the crisis we are looking at 5% t